I don't care what happens to the market. What serves the market best ultimately reduces to what serves corporations best. I don't care them.
I care about what happens to consumers, and what benefits them most. And thus far, we've seen the consumers best served by municipalities that have created their own broadband (e.g., Chattanooga). Competition still exists in such areas; the market hasn't died. And consumers receive maximum benefit.
So present day "lobbying" is ok because of what "lobbying" used to consist of as a strict textbook definition?
Stuff that. Present day lobbying isn't lobbying, it is bribery.
There is a vast gulf of difference between "bringing forth your concerns" and "bringing forth your concerns, and oh btw here's a bunch o'money for your re-election."
Sen. Inhofe being of the "climate change is a hoax because God says so" and "we should shut down the EPA, and repeal the clean air/water acts, because they never did anything useful" variety.
(dear mod stalker: this is not a troll post, but a fact)
No, he wouldnt have. Or rather, he would have scoffed at the idea of stopping at 99 weeks when there was still a need for more.
Because unlike you he actually understood that the purpose of all economic social programs, be it food stamps, welfare, or UI, is to function as a safety net, a financial safety net, both for the individual, and the economy as a whole. During stable times they act as a safety net for individuals. But during times of instability they can be expanded and act as a safety net for the economy as a whole (indeed it happens almost automatically as people sign up for them in larger nubmers during a recession). Because by keeping money flowing, you stop or slow the collapse of the economy, allowing it to recover isntead of going into a death spiral.
In other words, he understood that cutting spending in the middle of a recession and its recovery is detrimental to that recovery. the time to cut spending on emergency efforts is after the recovery, when people are back on their feet again.
In other words: you stock up on grain during the 7 years of plenty, such that you can weather the 7 years of famine. You dont try to re-stockpile your grain and stop handing it out during the 7 years of famine, but after them.
1) You clearly dont know what Marxist means 2) No he wouldnt, he also ran on a platform of blatant liberalism, and identified himself as such 3) In today's world Obama is farther to the right than Reagan the President/Politician (in contrast to Reagan the man; as a politician he moderated his views to maintain viability).
And if he did go you'd complain that he wasnt somewhere else putting out some other fire. That's how the game works: the President has a million things to do on any given day, so no matter what he does, you have 999,999 other things to blame him for not doing.
Let’s dispense with this specific question with no more than the attention it deserves: It would have been all but insane for President Obama to participate in a march, in public, in a foreign country, with a couple million people around him. The security requirements necessary to protect him make it impossible. The Secret Service has to do an extraordinary amount of work and planning for him to drop by Ben’s Chili Bowl a mile from the White House; the idea that with a couple of days notice he could walk through the streets of Paris in an enormous throng of people is absurd.
There was also an attempted NAACP bombing, but no one cares about that. there was also 2000 killed in Nigeria, but no one cares about that either. We're presently in tremendously important trade talks with India, but that's also not important.
At least unless Obama had gone to France, in which case you would be blaming him for: a) ignoring terrorism within our won country b) ignoring terrorism in Africa c) ignoring the needs of our economy by leaving a valueable trade partner in the middle of talks
Sen. Inhofe being of the "climate change is a hoax because God says so" and "we should shut down the EPA, and repeal the clean air/water acts, because they never did anything useful" variety.
the thing is you dont pay more taxes. you pay less.
College educations used to be almost entirely supported by taxes. Tuition used to be almost nonexistent, a pittance if it existed at all.
Education should not be treated as a scarce commodity that must be earned only by the worthy. And yes, Education IS a right.
But it is more than just a right of the individual. To society it is a necesity, an investment by which of society benefits. The return on investing in our own people, in ourselves, and our educations more than repays the cost of providing that education. Precisely how long do you think we can remain comeptitive if we dont make that investment while other societies do? We do nothing but harm ourselves while other more fit socieities take our place.
And yes I mean those evil "socialists" in Europe who no problem making these investments in themselves.
The idea of requiring a marketable skill is nonsense, dangerous nonsense, that serves only to perpetuate the concept of the citizen as no more than a cog in someone else's machine. If all you want are marketable skills, go to vocational school.
Education is an end in its own right and needs no further justification.
As for other people paying for it... it might interest you to know that in fact we did used to pay for it. State schools used to be nearly free, supported almost entirely through taxes. But then people used to think was value in an educated populace.
now they, and by that I include you, just want good lil worker drones trained for a task, rather than trained to think.
And why the dig at "community organizer" ? that just makes you look dumb and racist.
Nice try. But when taken in context of the entire speech, its not what you try to twist it into. The speech was condemning all of the hatred and bigotry.
The relevent section of the speech:
It is time to leave the call of violence and the politics of division behind. On so many issues, we face a choice between the promise of the future, or the prisons of the past. And we cannot afford to get it wrong. We must seize this moment. And America stands ready to work with all who are willing to embrace a better future.
The future must not belong to those who target Coptic Christians in Egypt — it must be claimed by those in Tahrir Square who chanted, "Muslims, Christians, we are one." The future must not belong to those who bully women — it must be shaped by girls who go to school, and those who stand for a world where our daughters can live their dreams just like our sons.
The future must not belong to those corrupt few who steal a country's resources — it must be won by the students and entrepreneurs, the workers and business owners who seek a broader prosperity for all people. Those are the women and men that America stands with; theirs is the vision we will support.
The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam. But to be credible, those who condemn that slander must also condemn the hate we see in the images of Jesus Christ that are desecrated, or churches that are destroyed, or the Holocaust that is denied.
Let us condemn incitement against Sufi Muslims and Shiite pilgrims. It's time to heed the words of Gandhi: "Intolerance is itself a form of violence and an obstacle to the growth of a true democratic spirit." Together, we must work towards a world where we are strengthened by our differences, and not defined by them. That is what America embodies, that's the vision we will support.
For some reason after a Christian zealot beheaded his roommate in Stillwater, I never heard my pastor denouce that kind of violence perpeuated in Christianity's name.
For some reason every time a Christian kills someone, not only do we not hear christians denouncing it, but we also never hear bigots like demanding that do so.
No it hasnt already happened. No there is not sharia in this country.
-Protesting a counterterrorism instructor who teaches that Muslims=bad isn't really earth shattering. Its common sense opposition to having a bigot pass off his bigotry as legitimate instruction for LEOs.
-One man saying something crazy at a city council meeting is hardly a suitable sample size. We have high profile politicians calling for Christian law to imposed on the country, ie theocracy, and many citizens like them saying the same at the local level. Yet those dont concern you, though they would impose many of the same restrictions you claim to be worried about, and is the far more likely (yet still thankfully still very remote) to occur event.
-Pamela Gellar. Seriosuly, thats like quoting George Wallace's opinions on race and civil rights.
and one of the "facts" you advocate is that "yes all muslims are extremists" which is blatantly wrong and bigoted.
You have said that Muslims are bent on world domination, that they are rattlesnakes, that no one denounces the extremists, that they are all extremists, closeted or otherwise, the book is a book of terrosist advice, and their religion is toxis and not welcome in western civ.
for these reasons, no matter how much you try to intellectually gussy up your stance with posts like the previous, you're still just another bigot.
And once again, you reconfirm your racism as well. Everything you stated is both false and hate speech.
It might interest you to note that one of the police officers killeed was in fact Muslim. Leaders are condeming it. It is a religion of peace, just as much any other religion with a chackered past, and a book that people can cherry pick out of to prove any point they wish. A handful of extremists do not define a religion of more than a billion people, no matter how many cartoonists or abortion clinics those extremists attack.
ButOnline, Fox News Shows Muslim Community Leaders Denouncing The Attack
On FoxNews.Com, Ahmadiyya Muslim Community USA SpokespersonCondemns Paris Attack.DuringaJanuary 7interviewwith Fox host Gregg JarettonFoxNews.com, Ahmadiyya Muslim Community USA Spokesperson Qasim Rashid condemned the attackin Paris and refuted the notion that Islam is inherently violent(emphasis added):
JARRETT: Do you think more Muslims in the Muslim-American community need to speak up and, like you, condemn this kind of attack?
RASHID: I think Muslims are doing a very good job of speaking up. And I think there's an important conversation to be had about recognizing that this is not an Islamic act of terror -- this is just an act of terror done by people claiming to ascribe to Islam.When we studyIslam, we see clearly that the Quran condemns this kind of violence categorically. That Prophet Muhammad said that aMuslim is one from whom all others are safe.
[...]
JARRETT: If, as you say, the Quran condemns thiskind ofviolence, why is it these Islamic extremists, these terrorists use the Quran as justification for committing these kinds of violent acts?
RASHID: Well,it's the same reason why any extremist group uses scripture. There's no shortage of extremists in everything. Let's not forget the Lord's Resistance Army, a Ugandan terrorist group, that claims to beChristian. And I would vehemently argue against anyone who would blame the bible, orJesusChrist, for their acts of terrorism.This is not about religion. This is about political power, this is about uneducated, ignorant youth who are being manipulated by clerics and extremists. And this is why it's all the more important for us, as the moderates, regardless of faith, to stay unitedand combat this.[FoxNews.com,1/7/15]
Many OtherMuslim OrganizationsHaveCondemned The Attack
French Muslim Council: Attack IsAn"Extremely Grave Barbaric Action."In a statement,the French Muslim Council condemned theParis attack as an"extremely grave barbaric action," and called it "an attackagainst democracy and the freedom of the press." [AlJazeera.com,1/7/15]
Muslim Council Of Britain Condemns Attack: "Nothing Justifies The Taking Of Life."The Muslim Council of Britain condemned the attack, saying "The Muslim Council of Britain condemns this attack. Whomever the attackers are, and whatever the cause may be, nothing justifies the taking of life." [Muslim Council of Britain,1/7/15]
Council On American-Islamic Relations: "We Strongly Condemn This Brutal And Cowardly Attack."CAIR strongly condemned the attack,calling it "brutal and cowardly," and used the opportunity to reiterate theorganization's "repudiation of any such assault on freedom of speech, even speech that mocks faiths and religious figures":
There are far more people, both in raw numbers as a percentage of the population, who are pushing for Christian law in our country than who push for Sharia.
In fact, the idea of Muslims pushing for sharia law is essentially a myth pushed Faux News and other idiots, such as yourself, who take the words of one or two individuals to mean that the entire population wants it. In which case, because of the words of Rick Santorum, Mike Huckabee, and Pat Robertson, I hereby declare that all Christians wish to impose Biblical Law on the nation.
Slashdot Mirror
Nonsense.
I don't care what happens to the market.
What serves the market best ultimately reduces to what serves corporations best.
I don't care them.
I care about what happens to consumers, and what benefits them most.
And thus far, we've seen the consumers best served by municipalities that have created their own broadband (e.g., Chattanooga).
Competition still exists in such areas; the market hasn't died.
And consumers receive maximum benefit.
Fox news disproves your point.
So present day "lobbying" is ok because of what "lobbying" used to consist of as a strict textbook definition?
Stuff that.
Present day lobbying isn't lobbying, it is bribery.
There is a vast gulf of difference between "bringing forth your concerns" and "bringing forth your concerns, and oh btw here's a bunch o'money for your re-election."
Your post is irrelevant drivel.
They put Sen. Inhofe in charge of the EPA.
Sen. Inhofe being of the "climate change is a hoax because God says so" and "we should shut down the EPA, and repeal the clean air/water acts, because they never did anything useful" variety.
(dear mod stalker: this is not a troll post, but a fact)
It's already started. Just yesterday the GOP Senators and Fox were accusing the President of being an obstructionist, already.
No, he wouldnt have.
Or rather, he would have scoffed at the idea of stopping at 99 weeks when there was still a need for more.
Because unlike you he actually understood that the purpose of all economic social programs, be it food stamps, welfare, or UI, is to function as a safety net, a financial safety net, both for the individual, and the economy as a whole. During stable times they act as a safety net for individuals. But during times of instability they can be expanded and act as a safety net for the economy as a whole (indeed it happens almost automatically as people sign up for them in larger nubmers during a recession). Because by keeping money flowing, you stop or slow the collapse of the economy, allowing it to recover isntead of going into a death spiral.
In other words, he understood that cutting spending in the middle of a recession and its recovery is detrimental to that recovery.
the time to cut spending on emergency efforts is after the recovery, when people are back on their feet again.
In other words: you stock up on grain during the 7 years of plenty, such that you can weather the 7 years of famine.
You dont try to re-stockpile your grain and stop handing it out during the 7 years of famine, but after them.
1) You clearly dont know what Marxist means
2) No he wouldnt, he also ran on a platform of blatant liberalism, and identified himself as such
3) In today's world Obama is farther to the right than Reagan the President/Politician (in contrast to Reagan the man; as a politician he moderated his views to maintain viability).
And if he did go you'd complain that he wasnt somewhere else putting out some other fire.
That's how the game works: the President has a million things to do on any given day, so no matter what he does, you have 999,999 other things to blame him for not doing.
http://www.bloomberg.com/polit...
http://www.washingtonpost.com/...
Let’s dispense with this specific question with no more than the attention it deserves: It would have been all but insane for President Obama to participate in a march, in public, in a foreign country, with a couple million people around him. The security requirements necessary to protect him make it impossible. The Secret Service has to do an extraordinary amount of work and planning for him to drop by Ben’s Chili Bowl a mile from the White House; the idea that with a couple of days notice he could walk through the streets of Paris in an enormous throng of people is absurd.
There was also an attempted NAACP bombing, but no one cares about that.
there was also 2000 killed in Nigeria, but no one cares about that either.
We're presently in tremendously important trade talks with India, but that's also not important.
At least unless Obama had gone to France, in which case you would be blaming him for:
a) ignoring terrorism within our won country
b) ignoring terrorism in Africa
c) ignoring the needs of our economy by leaving a valueable trade partner in the middle of talks
They put Sen. Inhofe in charge of the EPA.
Sen. Inhofe being of the "climate change is a hoax because God says so" and "we should shut down the EPA, and repeal the clean air/water acts, because they never did anything useful" variety.
Congratualtions, youve made it to Stage 3 of the 5 stages of Science Denialism.
No, everything else YOU just stated is false.
Everything the GP stated is true and backed by observational data.
His concerns dont make sense to you because you dont understand ship design.
your ignorance however doesnt invalidate his concerns.
Dude I dont even hear birds and squirrels anymore and I'm not that close to the city.
fun fact and hostry lesson: the same republicans who fought the new deal also fought the GI Bill as precisely that: a government handout.
the thing is you dont pay more taxes.
you pay less.
College educations used to be almost entirely supported by taxes.
Tuition used to be almost nonexistent, a pittance if it existed at all.
Education should not be treated as a scarce commodity that must be earned only by the worthy.
And yes, Education IS a right.
But it is more than just a right of the individual. To society it is a necesity, an investment by which of society benefits.
The return on investing in our own people, in ourselves, and our educations more than repays the cost of providing that education.
Precisely how long do you think we can remain comeptitive if we dont make that investment while other societies do? We do nothing but harm ourselves while other more fit socieities take our place.
And yes I mean those evil "socialists" in Europe who no problem making these investments in themselves.
The idea of requiring a marketable skill is nonsense, dangerous nonsense, that serves only to perpetuate the concept of the citizen as no more than a cog in someone else's machine. If all you want are marketable skills, go to vocational school.
Education is an end in its own right and needs no further justification.
As for other people paying for it... it might interest you to know that in fact we did used to pay for it.
State schools used to be nearly free, supported almost entirely through taxes.
But then people used to think was value in an educated populace.
now they, and by that I include you, just want good lil worker drones trained for a task, rather than trained to think.
And why the dig at "community organizer" ? that just makes you look dumb and racist.
Thats quite a load of bull there.
Oh look.
Another racist spouting lies got modded insightful.
http://www.mediamatters.org/re...
Nice try.
But when taken in context of the entire speech, its not what you try to twist it into.
The speech was condemning all of the hatred and bigotry.
The relevent section of the speech:
It is time to leave the call of violence and the politics of division behind. On so many issues, we face a choice between the promise of the future, or the prisons of the past. And we cannot afford to get it wrong. We must seize this moment. And America stands ready to work with all who are willing to embrace a better future.
The future must not belong to those who target Coptic Christians in Egypt — it must be claimed by those in Tahrir Square who chanted, "Muslims, Christians, we are one." The future must not belong to those who bully women — it must be shaped by girls who go to school, and those who stand for a world where our daughters can live their dreams just like our sons.
The future must not belong to those corrupt few who steal a country's resources — it must be won by the students and entrepreneurs, the workers and business owners who seek a broader prosperity for all people. Those are the women and men that America stands with; theirs is the vision we will support.
The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam. But to be credible, those who condemn that slander must also condemn the hate we see in the images of Jesus Christ that are desecrated, or churches that are destroyed, or the Holocaust that is denied.
Let us condemn incitement against Sufi Muslims and Shiite pilgrims. It's time to heed the words of Gandhi: "Intolerance is itself a form of violence and an obstacle to the growth of a true democratic spirit." Together, we must work towards a world where we are strengthened by our differences, and not defined by them. That is what America embodies, that's the vision we will support.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-...
http://www.mediamatters.org/re...
For some reason after a Christian zealot beheaded his roommate in Stillwater, I never heard my pastor denouce that kind of violence perpeuated in Christianity's name.
For some reason every time a Christian kills someone, not only do we not hear christians denouncing it, but we also never hear bigots like demanding that do so.
No it hasnt already happened.
No there is not sharia in this country.
-Protesting a counterterrorism instructor who teaches that Muslims=bad isn't really earth shattering. Its common sense opposition to having a bigot pass off his bigotry as legitimate instruction for LEOs.
-One man saying something crazy at a city council meeting is hardly a suitable sample size. We have high profile politicians calling for Christian law to imposed on the country, ie theocracy, and many citizens like them saying the same at the local level. Yet those dont concern you, though they would impose many of the same restrictions you claim to be worried about, and is the far more likely (yet still thankfully still very remote) to occur event.
-Pamela Gellar. Seriosuly, thats like quoting George Wallace's opinions on race and civil rights.
You're a fool.
and one of the "facts" you advocate is that "yes all muslims are extremists" which is blatantly wrong and bigoted.
You have said that Muslims are bent on world domination, that they are rattlesnakes, that no one denounces the extremists, that they are all extremists, closeted or otherwise, the book is a book of terrosist advice, and their religion is toxis and not welcome in western civ.
for these reasons, no matter how much you try to intellectually gussy up your stance with posts like the previous, you're still just another bigot.
And once again, you reconfirm your racism as well.
Everything you stated is both false and hate speech.
It might interest you to note that one of the police officers killeed was in fact Muslim. Leaders are condeming it. It is a religion of peace, just as much any other religion with a chackered past, and a book that people can cherry pick out of to prove any point they wish. A handful of extremists do not define a religion of more than a billion people, no matter how many cartoonists or abortion clinics those extremists attack.
From http://www.mediamatters.org/re... :
ButOnline, Fox News Shows Muslim Community Leaders Denouncing The Attack
On FoxNews.Com, Ahmadiyya Muslim Community USA Spokesperson Condemns Paris Attack.DuringaJanuary 7interviewwith Fox host Gregg JarettonFoxNews.com, Ahmadiyya Muslim Community USA Spokesperson Qasim Rashid condemned the attackin Paris and refuted the notion that Islam is inherently violent(emphasis added):
Many OtherMuslim OrganizationsHaveCondemned The Attack
French Muslim Council: Attack Is An "Extremely Grave Barbaric Action."In a statement,the French Muslim Council condemned theParis attack as an"extremely grave barbaric action," and called it "an attackagainst democracy and the freedom of the press." [AlJazeera.com,1/7/15]
Muslim Council Of Britain Condemns Attack: "Nothing Justifies The Taking Of Life."The Muslim Council of Britain condemned the attack, saying "The Muslim Council of Britain condemns this attack. Whomever the attackers are, and whatever the cause may be, nothing justifies the taking of life." [Muslim Council of Britain,1/7/15]
Council On American-Islamic Relations : "We Strongly Condemn This Brutal And Cowardly Attack."CAIR strongly condemned the attack,calling it "brutal and cowardly," and used the opportunity to reiterate theorganization's "repudiation of any such assault on freedom of speech, even speech that mocks faiths and religious figures":
There are far more people, both in raw numbers as a percentage of the population, who are pushing for Christian law in our country than who push for Sharia.
In fact, the idea of Muslims pushing for sharia law is essentially a myth pushed Faux News and other idiots, such as yourself, who take the words of one or two individuals to mean that the entire population wants it. In which case, because of the words of Rick Santorum, Mike Huckabee, and Pat Robertson, I hereby declare that all Christians wish to impose Biblical Law on the nation.
And another xenophobic racist who actually knows very little about the religion reveals himself.